1 Introduction

1.1 Context

In this paper, we first describe the context in which the teacher education programme titled English in Action (EIA hereafter) has been set up and then provide a brief overview of the project. Seminal reviews of teacher education programmes are presented next. These critiques observe that where programmes are concerned with outcomes, they are often within a human capital tradition and ignore the need to concretise the theory of action in actual situations. Although EIA needs to fulfil the evidence requirements of donors and policy makers, it addresses many of the issues raised in the reviews. However we recognise the need to capture the trajectory of teacher education programmes through the lens of teachers and students, the main stakeholders of the programme. We argue that we need to capture teachers’ and students’ voices that give us a peek into how they experience educational change and what capabilities they develop in the process. The paper suggests a way to capture and document the nuances of teacher and student learning in their own words that might be of relevance to other teacher education contexts.

Bangladesh is one of the most densely populated countries in the world, (UNPD, 2007), with a largely monolingual population: 95% of the population speak Bengali (or Bangla) as their mother tongue (BANBEIS, 2003). In 1974 the Bangladesh Education Commission mandated Bangla as the only language to be taught in primary schools. English was not introduced as a compulsory subject until 1990 (Hoque, 2009). For many years, English language was the most commonly failed school subject in national exams in Bangladesh (Kraft, Ehsan, & Khanam, 2009).

Baseline studies showed classroom practice dominated by teacher talk, usually represented by closed questions to which students gave ‘safe’ responses, individually or in chorus. In most English lessons observed, the majority of teacher and student talk was in Bangla; in 90% of lessons observed, there were very few opportunities for students to practice speaking or listening in English (English in Action (EIA), 2009b). Students’ proficiency in spoken English showed little evidence of progression, despite increasing years of exposure to English language teaching.

“There is little evidence of progression of language through the Primary schools… There is also little evidence of systematic progression through Secondary schools. The results show no increase in English language ability that can be specifically tied to working through the school grades” (English in Action (EIA), 2009a).

English in Action (EIA), a £50M, 99year (2008 to 2017) project, was designed to change the way that children, young people and adults in Bangladesh acquire English. EIA was initiated at the request of the Government of Bangladesh (GoB) and is funded by a grant from UKAid. EIA is managed by BMB Mott MacDonald, in partnership with the Open University, BBC Media Action and local Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). In this paper we consider only the schools component of EIA, as a case study of a large-scale programme of teacher development. Details of the approach to teacher development in the project are provided below.

1.2 Review of literature

It is now a little over a decade since two of the classic reviews of education in developing countries (Boissiere, 2004; Verspoor, 2005). Boissiere was amongst early calls to move attention beyond issues of access to issues of quality (p7) and sought to identify the determinants of quality outcomes in primary education, in terms of completion, literacy and numeracy. A key finding was that in many developing countries, the provision of textbooks or other learning materials had the highest impact for improving primary school outcomes, though this was caveated with the caution that those materials must be appropriate (not too difficult to understand and relevant to context) and teachers must be trained in conjunction with the introduction of learning materials (p34). Verspoor (2005) focussed instead upon the conditions that guide or underpin effective action to improve quality (p346). Although these conditions are framed at the level of national education systems, when addressing the question of ‘where to start’, Verspoor immediately focuses upon the school level, arguing the case studies show that empowering school communities and teachers to develop a sense of ownership over the quality improvement process (p348) and acknowledging the central role of the teacher as the agent of change should be the first priorities. The evidence presented by Verspoor suggests effective teacher development programmes, accompanied by provision of instructional materials and a supportive school environment are critical aspects of any attempt to improve quality.

Changes in teaching: What counts, who to, and how is it counted?

“…quality improvement will not succeed when teachers do not have the means or skills to apply successful instructional methods’ (Verspoor 2005, p349).

However, subsequent reviews of teacher education from both the developed and developing worlds provide only partial insights into what forms of teacher development are most effective in equipping teachers with ‘the means to apply successful instructional methods’, particularly in low- to-middleincomecountries.

Avalos (2011) reviews over a hundred articles on teacher professional development from 2000 – 2010 in the journal Teaching and Teacher Education; emerging themes include the specific needs of beginning teachers; the role of reflection in professional learning, and the use of tools (particularly new technologies) as learning instruments for teachers and students alike. The review charts a ‘vivid shift' from traditional forms of In Service Training (INSET) and the ‘master’ teacher educator role, towards teacher co-learning and partnerships with others within and beyondschool (p17-18). In trying to identify which forms of professional development were effective, Avalos observed: ‘…it was clear from the successful experiences narrated, that prolonged interventions are more effective than shorter ones, and that combinations of tools for learning and reflective experiences serve the purpose in a better way’ (p17). However, only one of the studies reviewed was from a developing country. Power et al (2014) also identified a number of studies from low- to-middle income countries, where new tools and technologies supported teachers in improving classroom practice or learning outcomes, within appropriate professional development contexts.

A DFID funded review focussed on evidence emerging from low-to-middle income countries (Westbrook et al., 2013), revealing the following about how teacher education can support effective pedagogy:

 professional development aligned with teachers’ needs, applied in context with follow up support;

 teacher peer support;

 support from the head teacher;

 appropriate curriculum in terms of level, accessibility and amount of content, and assessment aligned with content.

There were a number of gaps identified in the research:

“…with few exceptions …investigation of the effectiveness of training did not take a holistic view of pedagogy, that is measuring in a single study changes in teachers’ attitudes and beliefs, their knowledge…and their practices. Even here, students learning outcomes as a result of ITE or CPD were often not obtained for reasons of scale and feasibility (Westbrook et al. 2013 p.31).

Changes in teaching: What counts, who to, and how is it counted?

This observation is echoed by Tatto (2013, p3), who found that examples of large-scale systematic policy orientated research on teacher education were few and mostly in the school effectiveness tradition of economists, that disregard teacher development programmes theory of change (or action) or use poor outcome indicators, such as accumulated years of education (Tatto, 2013 p3). Tikly & Barrett (2011) have critiqued such ‘human capital’ approaches to understanding educational quality and impact, calling for an alternative understanding framed around human capabilities, that is more inclusive, relevant and democratic.

In summary, the evidence shows the importance of teachers and teacher development to improving educational quality, but is less robust about what forms of teacher development work best, or under what circumstances. Emerging themes include a shift from ‘master trainers’ to ‘teacher co-learning’, support over longer periods of time and support by those in the school community, especially peers, head teachers and school management committees. There is some evidence, mostly from developed economies, that ‘reflection’ and the use of tools or technologies may be effective. But there are three critical issues with the evidence base:

There is a dearth of evidence arising from large-scale studies in development contexts

Where there are such studies, they are often not ‘holistic’, or lack an appropriate theory of change (or action), so there is limited explanatory power

There is relatively little known about the changes in educational processes or outcomes that participant individuals or communities have reason to value; their voice is not heard in studies framed in the discourse of human capital.

Changes in teaching: What counts, who to, and how is it counted?

2.1 The EIA approach to teacher development

EIA has developed an innovative approach to large-scale school-based teacher development using mobile technology and local peer support, as an alternative to cascade or centre based teacher- training approaches. The EIA approach (Power, Shaheen, Solly, Woodward, & Burton, 2012) is well aligned with the emerging evidence on effective teacher development outlined above, placing emphasis on creating opportunities for teacher co-learning, using new tools and classroom resources, within supportive environments in school and beyond, over a sustained period of time. At the heart of the EIA model, teachers try out new classroom activities with their students; but before and after doing this, they talk about their understandings of what works, how, why and in what circumstances, with other teachers.

EIA is one of the relatively few programmes providing large-scale studies of teacher development, in lowto-middle income country contexts, that provide a holistic account of teacher and student attitudes, classroom practices and student learning outcomes (Westbrook et al, 2013). But although efforts have been made to understand processes and outcomes from participants’ perspectives, more could be done to make their voices heard, potentially enabling a much richer understanding of the processes, outcomes and contexts of effective teacher development, from participant perspectives.

2.2 Research framework and findings to date

Large scale studies

Westbrook et al. (2013) consider teachers’ and students’ perceptions, classroom practice, and students’ learning outcomes as crucial elements of a holistic teacher education programme. To measure the impact of the programme EIA carried out three large-scale quantitative studies focusing on Teachers’ and students’ perceptions, classroom practices, and students’ learning outcomes. The primary purpose of these studies was to address the evidence needs of the programme and donors, as manifest in the project log-frame. As such, they might be seen as situated within a human capital framework.

2.2.1 Teachers and students perception

The Perception study explores what teachers and students perceive of Communicative Language

Teaching (CLT), their experiences in English lessons, English in general, and of EIA intervention. Data is collected using self-administered structured questionnaire for teachers and secondary students; structured survey interview for primary students. The participants of the recent study (EIA 2014a) were primary teachers (269), primary Head Teachers (123), secondary teachers (143), primary students (376) and secondary student (457). Teachers report that they felt they had improved their English Language

Competence (96-99% of teachers agreed) and their confidence to use English language (88-89% agreed). Most teachers (63-66%) strongly agreed that the programme had impacted their teaching practice, and almost all (89%) agreed they now focus on student communication and interaction in their lessons. Most students (79-80%) report having more opportunity to speak in the target language in English lessons. However, there remains a strong residual attachment to traditional practices: for example, primary students report enjoying learning grammar rules (95%). English in Action (2014a).